Weekly News Update

Who What Wear explained the significance of black women being featured on the covers of September fashion magazines, including Beyonce on the recently released Vogue. (Last week we included a link to the Rihanna cover of British Vogue.)

Who What Wear also provided suggestions for a seven-piece, French-inspired capsule wardrobe for fall.

Fashionista took a look at potential benefits of Centella asiatica (nicknamed “cica”), an antioxidant-rich herb that has become “the beauty ingredient of the moment.”

The Washington Post reported on so-called Snapchat dysmorphia, when patients ask plastic surgeons to make them look like they do in Snapchat filters.

The Washington Post also reported on why a long-term NIH study on the effects of alcohol consumption was recently canceled.

Quartz at Work explained why companies should hire employees who would challenge their mission statements.

The New York Times provided statistics about the age gap of when women have babies, including county-by-county statistics on when women have their first child based on marital status and college education.

Kat, the Fortune article is great! I just agree 100%. We as women have to be careful, as women NOT to be too cozy with other women if it means we take too much time to advance women who otherwise do NOT deserve our help. We must focus on ONLY advancing the women who are of legitimate QUALITY, and not to advance women who are not even close to being up to SNUFF, just b/c they are women. I note that this does NOT mean discriminating against any women, just taking the time to advance all of the women who DO deserve our attention to be advanced, not the marginal ones who don’t who try and push us to advance them JUST B/C they are women. I have seen this already at my firm b/c I am now assisting the manageing partner in interviewing new candidate’s and there are more then a few women who have pulled me aside and asked that they be hired “because we are both women and need to do whatever we can to advance our own interests”. That does NOT make sense to me when comeing from a marginal candidate who just so happens to be a woman. FOOEY on that!!!!

If our firm is goeing to succeed, it is b/c we all work hard with common goals, NOT b/c we have a few people on the payroll who are dogging it but happen to be women. I would NOT hire a man who tried to play this card, and I will NOT do it for a marginal woman. I think that all other things being EQUAL, we can hire the woman, but if they are NOT, we must be gender neutral. If the man is better, we must go with the man, and that means no schmoes with brains. We need for men to bring to the table the total package, just as we, as women, want from other women. Does that make sense? I hope so. Anyway, have a great weekend, to the entire HIVE!!!!!

* If you'd like to avoid the moderation queue in the future, please make sure that the top two fields (Username & Email Address) are filled out, and the checkbox is checked. Thank you for reading!
Back to Top